ArticleApplied ergonomics2024
Overcoming recruitment hurdles in clinical trials: An investigation of remote consenting modalities and their impact on workload, workflow, and usability.
Article in Applied ergonomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of Telehealth Versus In-Person Informed Consent: Randomized Study of Comprehension and Decision-Making.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Remote Recruitment to Diversify Infant Research Participation: Lessons From the Infant Vaccine Biepository.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2026Article
- Article
- Enhanced pre-recruitment framework for clinical trial questionnaires through the integration of large language models and knowledge graphs.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Participant perspectives about decentralised trial procedures in a remote delivery nutrition intervention trial.Journal of nutritional science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Travel constraints can hinder the recruitment of eligible research participants in clinical trials, causing research timeline extensions, added costs, underpowered results, and early termination. Remote consenting can help solve these issues by allowing researchers and potential participants to connect remotely. This controlled experimental study investigates the effect of remote consenting on workload, workflow, usability, and barriers and facilitators to its implementation. Using a mixed experimental design, simulated consenting sessions were conducted with three different modalities (remote paper consent, eConsent, and teleconsent) with 23 researchers and 93 research participants. Each session involved a single researcher who experienced all three modalities, while three different research participants were assigned to each modality individually. Research participants and researchers completed surveys measuring workload and usability. Remote consenting allows researchers and participants to connect at their preferred location and time, and teleconsenting was found to be the preferred modality by the researchers, primarily due to its ability to exchange visual cues. However, challenges such as training requirements and technology dependence need to be addressed for widespread implementation. Future research should aim to eliminate these barriers and improve remote consenting modalities to facilitate clinical research participation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.